• Telorand@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    1 month ago

    To summarize differently, their argument goes that if you signed up for a trial of Disney+ (or some other such service), you agreed to an arbitration clause as part of the terms of service.

    They are arguing that the arbitration clause therefore applies to everything Disney-related, even if it’s a service unrelated to Disney+.

    I doubt this will stand a court’s scrutiny and will likely get tossed as unenforceable for being an unconscionable contract. Still, Disney sucks for even attempting such a maneuver, and it equally sucks that the US legal system is in such a state that they think this is a possible avenue for success.

    • yo_scottie_oh@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I wonder how much of it is Disney thinks this might actually work versus the ole delay, delay, delay tactic. Probably a little bit of both.

      • Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        They’re gonna do the delay tactic too but this is more insidious.

        The amount of money the husband is asking for isn’t all that much, pennies to them and in the greater scheme of things this is a nothing suit to them, low stakes. Since it’s low stakes they’re trying this tactic first to see if it’ll stick and create that dangerous precedent. I don’t suspect it’ll go through but with all these right wing pro capitalist judges it might, and it’s worth trying for them since it’s such a low stakes suit.

    • mbirth@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 month ago

      The even bigger irony is that he only sued for $50k. That’s peanuts for big D. Their lawyers probably got more for digging up that arbitration clause.

      • psud@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 month ago

        Disney will happily spend a million to defend against 50k if they have a chance of getting a court decision that their contract is valid for everything associated with the Disney brand

    • deranger@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      It’s broader than just a Disney+ trial account, it’s part of the whole Disney account, such as when you buy tickets as he did in 2023. Between that and the Florida judge I’m not sure it will get thrown out.

      Best case scenario is forced arbitration is just ended. It should be an option, not a requirement.

      https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8jl0ekjr0go

      Disney adds that Mr Piccolo accepted these terms again when using his Disney account to buy tickets for the theme park in 2023.